Inferential structure and reality problem is a serious issue to O.M.(oriental medicine). The study will analyze this issue through a philosophical and historical comparative study of W.M.M(Western modern medicine) and O.M. First, I presuppose some basic ideas. The first is the division of the 'the philosophy of medicine' and 'the medicine itself'. Second, there is a 'visibility' that discriminate between 'the abstractive concept' and 'the concrete object' in diagnostic terminology. The third is the separation of disease, the entity and disease, the phenomenon. Finally, the distinction between the cause of disease and the nature of disease. Through these basic concepts, this study will analyze O.M's diagnostic methodology, 'Pattern identification of the S.A.S(sign and symptom)'. The results are follows: 1. O.M's views disease as a phenomenon. So, the S.A.S, which is visible, is the disease itself. Tough the analysis and inference of the S.A.S, 證(zheng) the essence is derived. 2. 證(zheng) can be considered as 'the abstractive concept' reflecting the essence of a disease. 3. 證(zheng) is not arrived through causal sequence reasoning but rather by analogical reasoning. 4. 證(zheng) is 'the non-random correlative combination of S.A.S', pattern. These patterns secure the abstractive deduction in reality. that is, The causality, the positivism, the view of disease as entity, and anatomical knowledge are the traits peculiar to W.M.M. But, these properties can not be applied universally to every medical systems. Also, these properties do not indicate the superiority or inferiority of any medical system. 5. 證(zheng) summarizes the patients condition simultaneously with the S.A.S. However, 證(zheng) doesn't necessarily indicate the knowledge about the actual internal organ. That is, Early in O.M.'s history, the diagnostic terminologies including 證(zheng) were analogical reflections of a naive knowledge of internal organs and external environmental factors. Later, the naive knowledge in 證(zheng) changed int new nature, an abstractive concept. The confusion of the concept of disease, the indiscriminate acceptance of Western anatomical knowledge, and the O.M.'s theoretical evolution et are the challenge facing modern O.M. To find solutions, this study looks at the sequence of the birth of W.M.M. and then compares it's system with the O.M. system. The confusion of the concept of disease, the indiscriminate acceptance of Western anatomical knowledge, and the O.M.'s theoretical evolution et are the challenge facing modern O.M. To find solutions, this study looks at the sequence of the birth of W.M.M. and then compares it's system with the O.M. system. It is recommended that O.M. diagnostics should pay close attention to the ambiguity of the diagnostic methodology in order to further development. At present time, the concept and the system peculiar to O.M. can not be explained by common language. but O.M.'s practitioner can not persist in this manner an: longer. Along with the internal development of O.M., the adjustment of O.M.'s diagnostic terminology needs to be adopted.